U.S. Internal Policy + Surveillance Society

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


come on , Not again

US police officers beating a mentally-ill man with batons in Salinas, California


bYlcAkv5Sx8


.

[Endovelico]

come on , Not again

US police officers beating a mentally-ill man with batons in Salinas, California

The US are quickly becoming the IV Reich where everybody who isn't a politician, a capitalist, a police officer or a soldier will be treated the way Jews were in Nazi Germany. Where are the modern versions of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, George Washington?...

[Simple Minded]

come on , Not again

US police officers beating a mentally-ill man with batons in Salinas, California

The US are quickly becoming the IV Reich where everybody who isn't a politician, a capitalist, a police officer or a soldier will be treated the way Jews were in Nazi Germany. Where are the modern versions of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, George Washington?...

Portugal?

Maybe, the cops mistook the mentally ill dude for an oligarch?............ you know, eggs, omelets, etc.

[Typhoon]

come on , Not again

US police officers beating a mentally-ill man with batons in Salinas, California

The US are quickly becoming the IV Reich where everybody who isn't a politician, a capitalist, a police officer or a soldier will be treated the way Jews were in Nazi Germany. Where are the modern versions of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, George Washington?...

". . . quickly becoming . . . " ?

Dude, you need to get out and travel a bit more.

Colonial misadventures don't count.

[noddy]

i love it when people post random events from a population of hundreds of millions across 50 odd poltical zonres and then seriously draw conclusions from that.

i cant claim to be keeping track of the states involved but california, florida and new york seem to show up quite a bit

[Simple Minded]

come on , Not again

US police officers beating a mentally-ill man with batons in Salinas, California

The US are quickly becoming the IV Reich where everybody who isn't a politician, a capitalist, a police officer or a soldier will be treated the way Jews were in Nazi Germany. Where are the modern versions of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, George Washington?...

". . . quickly becoming . . . " ?

Dude, you need to get out and travel a bit more.

Colonial misadventures don't count.

Amen!

[Simple Minded]

i love it when people post random events from a population of hundreds of millions across 50 odd poltical zonres and then seriously draw conclusions from that.

i cant claim to be keeping track of the states involved but california, florida and new york seem to show up quite a bit

The easiest part about projectin yer magination is ya don't need a lot of datapoints.

"We" (the Bilderbergers) have designated those three states as our dumping grounds for our eugenics failures & those with mental irregularities........ along with some parts of the Middle East & Europe that have pre-existing fences in the forms of desserts and mountains.....

Being an oligarch is a thankless job....

Seriously though, one of the most fascinating aspects of modern times, at least to me, is that for many, any single instance of bad behavior is proof of epidemic, immanent, cultural demise.

Doomer porn used to seem somewhat personal, now with the endless marketing of group identity, the continual threat of us vs. them seems more rampant than ever.

this truly must be the end times...... at last!

[Typhoon]

Country singer Randy Howard shot dead in gunfight with bounty hunter

IS5mwymTIJU

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


This tells the Chinese the identities of almost everybody who has got a United States security clearance,”
“The database also tells the Chinese an enormous amount of information about almost everyone with a security clearance. That’s a gold mine. It helps you approach and recruit spies,”

The latest estimates suggest hackers might have managed to steal between nine and 14 million records, stretching back to the 1980s.

Said many times you guys start silly things and BANG blowBack follows .. now go figure


.

[noddy]

if it wasnt for that dastardly snowden we would have got away with it.

[Endovelico]

CIA torture appears to have broken spy agency rule on human experimentation
Spencer Ackerman - Monday 15 June 2015 12.33 BST
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015 ... on-doctors

The Central Intelligence Agency had explicit guidelines for “human experimentation” before, during and after its post-9/11 torture of terrorism detainees, the Guardian has learned, which raise new questions about the limits on internal oversight over the agency’s in-house and contracted medical research.
'Human experimentation' and the CIA: read the previously classified document

Sections of a previously classified CIA document, made public by the Guardian on Monday, empower the agency’s director to “approve, modify, or disapprove all proposals pertaining to human subject research”. The leeway provides the director, who has never in the agency’s history been a medical doctor, with significant influence over limitations the US government sets to preserve safe, humane and ethical procedures on people.

CIA director George Tenet approved abusive interrogation techniques, including waterboarding, designed by CIA contractor psychologists. He further instructed the agency’s health personnel to oversee the brutal interrogations – the beginning of years of controversy, still ongoing, about US torture as a violation of medical ethics.

But the revelation of the guidelines has prompted critics of CIA torture to question how the agency could have ever implemented what it calls “enhanced interrogation techniques” – despite apparently having rules against “research on human subjects” without their informed consent.

Indeed, despite the lurid name, doctors, human-rights workers and intelligence experts consulted by the Guardian said the agency’s human-experimentation rules were consistent with responsible medical practices. The CIA, however, redacted one of the four subsections on human experimentation.

“The more words you have, the more you can twist them, but it’s not a bad definition,” said Scott Allen, an internist and medical adviser to Physicians for Human Rights.

The agency confirmed to the Guardian that the document was still in effect during the lifespan of the controversial rendition, detention and interrogation program.

After reviewing the document, one watchdog said the timeline suggested the CIA manipulated basic definitions of human experimentation to ensure the torture program proceeded.

“Crime one was torture. The second crime was research without consent in order to say it wasn’t torture,” said Nathaniel Raymond, a former war-crimes investigator with Physicians for Human Rights and now a researcher with Harvard University’s Humanitarian Initiative.

The document containing the guidelines, dated 1987 but updated over the years and still in effect at the CIA, was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the ACLU and shared with the Guardian, which is publishing it for the first time.

The relevant section of the CIA document, “Law and Policy Governing the Conduct of Intelligence Agencies”, instructs that the agency “shall not sponsor, contract for, or conduct research on human subjects” outside of instructions on responsible and humane medical practices set for the entire US government by its Department of Health and Human Services.

A keystone of those instructions, the document notes, is the “subject’s informed consent”.

That language echoes the public, if obscure, language of Executive Order 12333 – the seminal, Reagan-era document spelling out the powers and limitations of the intelligence agencies, including rules governing surveillance by the National Security Agency. But the discretion given to the CIA director to “approve, modify, or disapprove all proposals pertaining to human subject research” has not previously been public.

The entire 41-page CIA document exists to instruct the agency on what Executive Order 12333 permits and prohibits, after legislative action in the 1970s curbed intelligence powers in response to perceived abuses – including the CIA’s old practice of experimenting on human beings through programs like the infamous MK-Ultra project, which, among other things, dosed unwitting participants with LSD as an experiment.

The previously unknown section of the guidelines empower the CIA director and an advisory board on “human subject research” to “evaluate all documentation and certifications pertaining to human research sponsored by, contracted for, or conducted by the CIA”.

Experts assessing the document for the Guardian said the human-experimentation guidelines were critical to understanding the CIA’s baseline view of the limits of its medical research – limits they said the agency and its medical personnel violated during its interrogations, detentions and renditions program after 9/11.

The presence of medical personnel during brutal interrogations of men like Abu Zubaydah, they said, was difficult to reconcile with both the CIA’s internal requirement of “informed consent” on human experimentation subjects and responsible medical practices.

When Zubaydah, the first detainee known to be waterboarded in CIA custody, “became completely unresponsive, with bubbles rising through his open, full mouth”, he was revived by CIA medical personnel – known as the Office of Medical Services (OMS) – according to a CIA account in the Senate intelligence committee’s landmark torture report.
CIA torture: health professionals 'may have committed war crimes', report says

The OMS doctors were heavily involved in the torture of detainees in CIA custody. They advised interrogators on the physical and psychological administration of what the agency called “enhanced interrogation techniques”. After observation, the doctors offered perspectives on calibrating them to specific detainees’ resilience.

OMS staff assigned to the agency’s black sites wrote emails with subject lines like: “Re: acceptable lower ambient temperatures”.

The CIA, which does not formally concede that it tortured people, insists that the presence of medical personnel ensured its torture techniques were conducted according to medical rigor. Several instances in the Senate torture report, partially declassified six months ago, record unease among OMS staff with their role in interrogations.

There is a disconnect between the requirement of this regulation and the conduct of the interrogation program
Steven Aftergood, Federation of American Scientists

But other physicians and human rights experts who have long criticized the role of medical staff in torture said the extensive notes from CIA doctors on the interrogations – as they unfolded – brought OMS into the realm of human experimentation, particularly as they helped blur the lines between providing medical aid to detainees and keeping them capable of enduring further abusive interrogations.

Doctors take oaths to guarantee they inflict no harm on their patients.

Zubaydah “seems very resistant to the water board”, an OMS official emailed in August 2002. “No useful information so far ... He did vomit a couple of times during the water board with some beans and rice. It’s been 10 hours since he ate so this is surprising and disturbing. We plan to only feed Ensure for a while now. I’m head[ing] back for another water board session.”

Doctors and intelligence experts said they could imagine legitimate, non-abusive CIA uses for human experimentation.

Steven Aftergood, a scholar of the intelligence agencies with the Federation of American Scientists, suggested that the agency might need to study polygraph effects on its agents; evaluate their performance under conditions of stress; or study physiological indicators of deception.

But all said that such examples of human experimentation would require something that the CIA never had during the interrogation program: the informed consent of its subjects.

“There is a disconnect between the requirement of this regulation and the conduct of the interrogation program,” said Aftergood. “They do not represent consistent policy.”

Months after Zubaydah’s interrogation, Tenet issued formal guidance approving brutal interrogation techniques, including waterboarding. Tenet explicitly ordered medical staff to be present – a decision carrying the effect of having them extensively document and evaluate the torture sessions.

“[A]ppropriate medical or psychological personnel must be on site during all detainee interrogations employing Enhanced Techniques,” Tenet wrote in January 2003. “In each case, the medical and psychological staff shall suspend the interrogation if they determine that significant and prolonged physical or mental injury, pain or suffering is likely to result if the interrogation is not suspended.”

In response to the Guardian’s questions about the newly disclosed document and its implications for the CIA’s post-9/11 torture program, CIA spokesperson Ryan Trapani provided the following statement:

“CIA has had internal guidelines interpreting Executive Order 1233 in place continuously from 1987 to present. While some provisions in these guidelines have been amended since September 11, 2001, none of those amendments changed provisions governing human experimentation or were made in response to the detention and interrogation program.”

Ironically, the only part of the CIA’s torture program in which agency officials claimed they were hamstrung by prohibitions on human experimentation is when they were asked by John Helgerson, their internal inspector general, if torture was effective.

Their response was framed as an example of the agency respecting its own prohibition on human experimentation. In more recent days, the CIA has used it as a cudgel against the Senate report’s extensive conclusions that the torture was ultimately worthless.

“[S]ystematic study over time of the effectiveness of the techniques would have been encumbered by a number of factors,” reads a CIA response given to Helgerson in June 2003, a point the agency reiterated in its formal response to the Senate intelligence committee. Among them: “Federal policy on the protection of human subjects.”
Psychologists met in secret with Bush officials to help justify torture – report

Harvard’s Raymond, using the agency’s acronym for its “enhanced interrogation technique” euphemism, said the CIA must have known its guidelines on human experimentation ruled out its psychologist-designed brutal interrogations.

“If they were abiding by this policy when EIT came up, they wouldn’t have been allowed to do it,” Raymond said. “Anyone in good faith would have known that was human subject research.”

Dr. Joseph Mengel would be proud of his disciples!... Soon the only possible answer to these practices will be shooting the bastards on sight...

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Iranian students suing Norway

.

[YMix]

Privacy activists mass-quit U.S. government committee on facial recognition privacy
By Cory Doctorow at 9:00 am Thu, Jun 18, 2015

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration is trying to work out the rules for facial recognition -- whether and when cameras can be put in public places that programatically identify you as you walk past and then save a record of where you've been and who you were with.

NTIA -- part of the Commerce Department -- invited privacy groups to sit on the committee alongside industry, but the deliberations did not impress the privacy groups as a process likely to produce a decent outcome. On Monday, nine privacy groups walked out of the group in a mass-resignation, stating that "Industry lobbyists are choking off Washington’s ability to protect consumer privacy."

“This should be a wake-up call to Americans: Industry lobbyists are choking off Washington’s ability to protect consumer privacy,” Alvaro Bedoya, executive director of the Center on Privacy & Technology at Georgetown Law, said in a statement.

“People simply do not expect companies they’ve never heard of to secretly track them using this powerful technology. Despite all of this, industry associations have pushed for a world where companies can use facial recognition on you whenever they want — no matter what you say. This position is well outside the mainstream.”

Ben Sobel, a researcher and Google Policy Fellow at the Center on Privacy & Technology, wrote last week for the Washington Post about the extraordinary advances in facial recognition technology that have gone largely unnoticed by the public. “Being anonymous in public might be a thing of the past,” he wrote.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Americans twice as likely to be killed by right-wing terrorism than Muslim jihadists


.

[Heracleum Persicum]

.


Churchix

.

http://rt.com/news/270121-church-facial ... -software/

Churches around the world have started to secretly keep tabs on their congregants with facial recognition software.

Around 30 churches from countries such as the US, Indonesia, India, and Portugal have started to use Churchix, a specialized program designed for religious institutions by an American-Israeli company called Face-Six . .

"In the beginning, I was surprised. We never thought of churches as potential clients, but we now understand the need. Most churches do already keep track of their members," said Rhubarb Greenshpan, the CEO of the company.

..

The Face-Six CEO explained that the software works better if openly used with visitors voluntarily looking at the camera at a check point, adding that churches prefer not to draw attention to such actions.

“I don’t think churches tell people,” said Greenshpan . “We encourage them to do so, but I don’t think they do. The major question is, should the church keep track of members when they attend events, whether it is manually, or electronically?"

.

[Doc]

http://phys.org/news/2015-01-china-bloc ... tml#inlRlv

China blocks VPN services that skirt online censorship

Jan 23, 2015 by By Jack Chang

China blocks VPN services that skirt online censorship
In this Aug. 19, 2013 file photo, computer users sit near a monitor display with a message from the Chinese police on the proper use of the Internet at an Internet cafe in Beijing, China. China is blocking VPN services that let users skirt …more

China is blocking VPN services that let users skirt online censorship of popular websites such as Google and Facebook amid a wider crackdown on online information, tech companies and specialists said Friday.

The virtual private network provider Golden Frog wrote on its blog that the controls have hit a wide swath of VPN services. The popular provider Astrill informed its users this week that its VPN protocols for Apple mobile devices to access services such as Gmail have been blocked.

The Chinese government blocks thousands of websites to prevent what it deems politically sensitive information from reaching Chinese users. Many foreigners in China as well as millions of Chinese depend on VPNs to connect to servers outside the country and access blocked information and Google-based business tools. VPNs encrypt and reroute Internet traffic so that censors can't tell what's being accessed.

"The Chinese government has attempted to curtail the use of VPNs that its citizens use to escape the Great Firewall for a couple years," wrote Golden Frog President Sunday Yokubaitis in a statement. "This week's attack on VPNs that affected us and other VPN providers is more sophisticated than what we've seen in the past."

The Chinese government's agency for regulating the Internet did not immediately respond to questions.

China-based entrepreneur Richard Robinson said the controls have particularly hurt small- and medium-sized foreign companies that depend on VPNs. Many larger companies can afford direct connections to servers outside the country, he said.

Over the past weeks, Chinese censors have already blocked what remaining access there is to Gmail and other Google products. Google services have been periodically blocked or limited since 2010 when the company said it would no longer cooperate with China's censors.

"These smaller businesses, they're dependent on Gmail," Robinson said.

The crackdown comes during sensitive political times, as President Xi Jinping's government prosecutes top officials accused of corruption, said Xiao Qiang, an adjunct professor with UC Berkeley's School of Information.

"We all know that China is in the middle of a very ferocious power struggle or political cleansing under the name of an anti-corruption campaign," Xiao said. "That to me is a very clearly related fact with the amount of political rumors and information related to China's high politics showing up in websites outside of China."

And while the controls hurt businesses that depend on online information and tools, Chinese censors are more worried about restricting political information, Xiao said.

[Doc]

http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/30/its ... our-child/

It’s Official: The Feds Will Collect Psycho-Social Data On Your Child

Government of the people and by the people should not plumb and manipulate the people’s psyches and emotions, especially when so many kids can still hardly read and cipher.

Jane Robbins
By Jane Robbins
June 30, 2015

Every year, hundreds of thousands of U.S. students take the National Assessment of Educational Progress (the NAEP), the federally authorized test known as the “nation’s report card.” Education Week reported recently that, beginning in 2017, NAEP will ask “background questions” designed to gauge each student’s level of “motivation, mindset, and grit.” It’s not enough for the federal government to keep tabs on whether your child knows the material he’s been taught. Instead, it wants to peer inside his mind and critique his personality to see if he has the “noncognitive skills” government thinks he should.


As described by the Educational Testing Service at a conference of the Association for Psychological Science, two of the categories on the NAEP background survey will be labeled “grit” and “desire for learning.” Questions in these categories will be presented to all test-takers. Specific subject areas may include additional questions about other “noncognitive factors” such as “self-efficacy” and “personal achievement goals.”

Almost any parent would read this and wonder why his child’s mindsets and personal goals are any of the government’s business. Indeed, there is serious doubt whether NAEP even has the statutory authority to delve into such matters. The federal statute authorizing NAEP requires that the assessment “objectively measure academic achievement, knowledge, and skills” and that the tests “do not evaluate or assess personal or family beliefs and attitudes . . . .” The statute further requires that NAEP “only collect information that is directly related to the appraisal of academic achievement . . . .”

Presumably NAEP bureaucrats would argue that the background questions aren’t part of the assessment itself, so don’t violate the prohibition against assessing attitudes. Even so, is the non-cognitive information these questions collect “directly related to the appraisal of academic achievement”? Only in the sense that every aspect of one’s personality might theoretically affect one’s academic performance. If we take that broad a view, there is no limit to what NAEP can ask about.

Do you find yourself getting frustrated when you study? Does poor academic performance make your parents angry with you? Do you have problems at home that might affect your schoolwork? We’re here to help.

Now Schools Are Responsible for Kids’ Feelings

In any event, it’s no surprise that a federal education program is moving beyond assessing academic knowledge and into the realm of attitudes, mindsets, and dispositions. For years now, the federal government has openly advocated teaching and measuring the “appropriate” (that is, government-approved) mindsets for students. The concept is known as “social/emotional learning,” or SEL.

Do we really want the government determining what types of attitudes and mindsets are necessary to be a ‘good citizen and worker’?

Where did this concept come from? The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) cites research arguing that education should focus on non-cognitive development as well as academic knowledge. CASEL, the major player in this arena, has identified five “SEL domains” (self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible decision-making skills) and advocates that schools take responsibility for developing these traits in students from preschool through grade 12.

The first objection that leaps to mind is that, for the most part, school personnel are not qualified to plumb the depths of a child’s psyche. As warned by clinical psychologist Gary Thompson, placing this type of responsibility on largely untrained personnel is playing with fire. And since the federal government is actively relaxing the privacy restrictions applicable to student data, the chances of this sensitive information getting into the wrong hands are enormous.

The more fundamental issue, though, is who should be responsible for helping instill these personality traits: schools (i.e., government) or families? Each of these non-cognitive domains is nebulous, and the desirability of a particular outcome will vary from individual to individual. For example, a child’s parents might hold a different view about what types of “social awareness” are appropriate, compared to the government’s desire to sensitize children to “global problems” such as climate change. Or the government might value the “relationship skill” of acquiescing to the consensus of the group, instead of the parents’ preference for developing the backbone to stand up for the right and true in the face of contrary pressure.

In short, the dangers of transferring this type of child development from parents to the government are mind-boggling. Do we really want the government determining what types of attitudes and mindsets are necessary to be a “good citizen and worker”?


Enticing States Into Manipulating Kids’ Psyches

Nevertheless, the U. S. Department of Education (USED) is a huge proponent of SEL to develop the right mix of social and emotional traits in children. It has just kicked off a new competitive grant program to entice states into this minefield. Apparently, public schools have now achieved perfection in teaching academic content and can move on to more esoteric pursuits. As one exasperated parent in Connecticut remarked, “I feel like the school is teaching what I should be teaching (social and emotional traits) and I’m teaching what the school should be teaching (math).”

Apparently, public schools have now achieved perfection in teaching academic content and can move on to more esoteric pursuits.

Of course, if you teach these mindsets, you must measure them. In February 2013, USDOE’s Office of Educational Technology released a draft report called “Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance: Critical Factors for Success in the 21st Century,” which seeks to “push the frontiers” of assessing students’ most personal attributes. This report argues non-cognitive traits must be measured and suggests that physiological readings and neuroimaging techniques (brain-scanning) could do the trick. The Grit report even helpfully provides pictures of the devices, such as facial-expression cameras and posture-analysis seats, that can be used on students “to examine frustration, motivation/flow, confidence, boredom, and fatigue.”

To be sure, the report devotes an entire paragraph (in 95 pages) to the appalling invasion of privacy these techniques would entail. But the primary problem it identifies is that these devices can be “impractical for use in school settings.” That is a temporary problem, however—the report lauds the Gates Foundation for funding research that may solve the impracticability dilemma. Think of what wonderful readings of children’s brains we can get once we achieve cost-effectiveness.

Most parents would be horrified to learn what the feds and the progressive education establishment want to do with their children’s most personal data. This white paper lays it out (including the threats posed by “personalized” interactive digital-learning platforms, which is too broad a topic to tackle here).

In the meantime, NAEP will push education in this direction by asking children to report their personalities and mindsets. After collecting and analyzing the NAEP assessment data, what does the federal government intend to do with the results? Will it create a one-size-fits-all set of SEL standards every child must meet? If so, would schools then be required to intervene and “help” children become the people the government wants them to be? It would be only to improve their education. Of course.

[Doc]

THE BIGGEST DATA BREECH IN HISTORY

eIA1lQBqH1s

And he is using the Federal Government to collect it so he can use it for his own political hackery. It should come in really handy to stifle dissent via blackmail and intimidation. But it is also going to be given out to whoever Obama wants to give it to.


http://hotair.com/archives/2015/07/19/o ... -imagined/

Obama’s awesome new race database even more awesome than you imagined


posted at 5:01 pm on July 19, 2015 by Jazz Shaw

We recently discussed a story that wasn’t particularly popular here (to be charitable) which dealt with a new White House plan to implement enforced neighborhood diversity in American towns and cities through the power and influence of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The rest of the nation wasn’t exactly pleased with the idea either, but it did raise some interesting questions. One of the biggest among those was the puzzle of exactly how the federal government plans to figure out precisely how many people in each racial pigeonhole are living where and how they are interacting. Is that sort of data even available to be used in making such determinations, assuming you wanted to do it?

The short answer seems to be “no.” The longer – and apparently more accurate – answer is, “not yet.” But never fear, citizens! As Paul Sperry reports for the New York Post, the required data collection is on the way and it’s going to be mind blowing.

A key part of President Obama’s legacy will be the fed’s unprecedented collection of sensitive data on Americans by race. The government is prying into our most personal information at the most local levels, all for the purpose of “racial and economic justice.”

Unbeknown to most Americans, Obama’s racial bean counters are furiously mining data on their health, home loans, credit cards, places of work, neighborhoods, even how their kids are disciplined in school — all to document “inequalities” between minorities and whites.

This Orwellian-style stockpile of statistics includes a vast and permanent network of discrimination databases, which Obama already is using to make “disparate impact” cases against: banks that don’t make enough prime loans to minorities; schools that suspend too many blacks; cities that don’t offer enough Section 8 and other low-income housing for minorities; and employers who turn down African-Americans for jobs due to criminal backgrounds.

I assumed at first that they would just be tapping into the census data, but that’s severely limited for this sort of preferential racial tracking. People tend to move around, so the big, decennial numbers tend to go stale after a while. Also, for the majority of respondents, they don’t tell you much more than a zip code to match up with the racial data – far less than you’d need for some of Obama’s ambitious plans. Sperry’s report breaks down some of the digital treasure troves which are being mined to fill in all of those gaps and it’s sounding more and more like The Central Scrutinizer from Joe’s Garage by Frank Zappa.

First there’s the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing database which was announced in our previous coverage linked above. It breaks down every neighborhood by four racial groups and identifies the ones which are in need of correction. (If the ZIP code in question has less than 50% “non-white population” is fails to escape the category of being “segregated.”) But wait… there’s more! The Federal Housing Finance Agency will be tapped to provide individual credit scores (along with “all credit lines” of all types) and employment history. Loan approvals will be tested against racial data along with those other fiscal criteria to root out racism in that sector even if none is being alleged.

But don’t stop there. The new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (brainchild of Liz Warren) will be providing everyone’s credit card accounts sorted by race. (Side note: I don’t recall telling them my race when I got my last credit card. Odd.) Oh, and the banks will all need to tell Big Brother the race of everyone they hire as well as everyone who applies for a job. That should help them keep an eye on Wall Street, eh? Oh, and wait until you see what the Education Department is up to.


Through its mandatory Civil Rights Data Collection project, the Education Department is gathering information on student suspensions and expulsions, by race, from every public school district in the country. Districts that show disparities in discipline will be targeted for reform.

Those that don’t comply will be punished. Several already have been forced to revise their discipline policies, which has led to violent disruptions in classrooms.

This is some groundbreaking stuff, folks. Has there ever been such an assemblage of personal, private data by the federal government? To what purpose will all of this be put? And apparently it can all be done by the stroke of a pen in the White House without any congressional action or involvement. I suppose the final question here is… is there any way to stop it?

[Alexis]

eaPwqokBn9M

General Wesley Clark, former SACEUR, former candidate to Democrat ticket for presidency, proposes live on TV "internment camps" for "radicalized" and "disloyal Americans".

Just as during WWII, those people would be subject to internment "for the duration of the conflict". As the General underlines, "We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized" so as to "cut this off at the beginning"



Finally ! After sixty-two so long years...



... HE IS RISEN !

[YMix]

Seen this yesterday, I think. My question: what exactly does "for the duration of the conflict" mean, seeing that the USA is at (undeclared) war pretty much all the time? Since nobody in Washington expects the GWOT to end any time soon, I'm guessing Clark wants these people interned for life.

[Endovelico]

Now to the next stage...

[Heracleum Persicum]

eaPwqokBn9M

[Alexis]

(same video as a little above)

Err, Azari, do you occasionnally read most recent messages of the thread before posting?

The very same video was posted not three pages, but three posts before your own...


Have you modeled your posting technique on Bob Munden's shooting one?

iS9uGktUCrY

[Heracleum Persicum]

.

Err, Azari, do you occasionnally read most recent messages of the thread before posting?

The very same video was posted not three pages, but three posts before your own...

.

.. sorry , Alexis, did not see the clip


Well, what you say about what Wesley Clark sayin ? ? Seems not learned from history

.

[Parodite]

The message of Clark to lone radicalized wolf hunger killers: don't tell anyone, shave your beard, wear casual cloths or 3d suit. A tatoo on your arm I Love Jesus will do miracles too. Nobody will see you coming. Piece of cake.